Of the year award ceremony. And my colleague dan mccarthy has the run of show and will be taking lead for us. So before i kick it over to him, im going to introduce him he is is ise a Vice President for the collegiate network as well as the editor of acs journal modern, which you all have your seats and they just modern age just introduced and launched a new website which you should go look at at modern age journal dot com and with that i will turn it over to dan thank you for being here. Thank you, tom. And thank you for joining us this evening. Isi has been educating liberty on americas troubled campuses since 1953. Our founder shorter of believed it was not enough complain about socialism and antiu. S. Southern ideology. We have to teach the alternative the roots of our civilization, the isi henry and an apology book award honors writers who excelled in defining the crisis of our times and instructing indeed reminding us of the solutions the award has possible by the generous gifts of henry and an apology to remarkable individuals who together became an extraordinary force. And paolucci was at Barnard College and columbia. She taught at city college, new york, and became the First UniversityResearch Professor at Saint Johns University in new york. She was a scholar. The renaissance of the theater of esthetics. She was an author, and she was the founder and president of. The council on Natural National literatures. She also established the school and at henry palatucci International Conference center in new york, her husband and, kindred spirit, henry pollard, she was a graduate of city college of new york. He served in the nascent u. S. Force in the Second World War and later earned his ph. D. From Columbia University, a man of action as well as scholarship professor carlucci was instrumental in the growth of the conservative party of new. As a scholar, he taught iona college, Brooklyn College city college, Columbia University and st Johns University in new york. We are grateful to the memory of the policies and for the presence of their friends and family. Tonight, senator seraphim, multisite clarissa, rocio. Michael, michael. Michelle and azar arturo. Were also very grateful for the support of athos, a powerhouse literary and publicity agency, and its cofounder, jonathan brzezinski. Now, let me tell you, our honoree, a man, whose ideas and reporting are at the vanguard, a counterrevolution against the radicals who have hijacked our nations institutions. Christopher rufo is a senior fellow and the director of the initiative Critical Race Theory at the manhattan. He is a contributing editor at city journal and the author of the New York Times bestseller for which we recognize him tonight americas cultural revolution how the left and the radical how the radical left conquered everything, his research and exposing Critical Race Theory have inspired a president ial executive order and legislation in more than 20 states. As a filmmaker, he has directed for pbss Netflix International television. He holds degrees from Georgetown University and harvard, although in the latter case they resent him for it. And he lives in the Pacific Northwest with his wife and three sons. Tonight joins us here in the heart of the swamp in washington, dc. Please welcome chris rufo. Thank you. Its great to. Be here. Lets not drop the award shatter it. And id be a little embarrassing. Its great to be here, to be honored for a book. This is my first book. Ive directed films, which is a much more active enterprise. You go into some forgotten territory you spent a year of your life observing something in the wild and then spend time huddled in a dark room editing something into shape. By contrast, the book is actually much easier. And then so. So its been kind of a fun thing to to write this book, but what i think id like to talk about tonight is that, you know, a book either be dead or alive. There are many books that are kind of spiritually or politically dead, even if they have some content to them. But what i tried to do with this book is to make sure that it was not oriented towards the good prose, solid research, a good line of argument, some historical, but it was actually oriented towards active political life. And so the subject of the book is political. Its one story, i think a very important story of the last half century of american political life. Looking at how a radical wing Political Movement that never achieved popularity, that never achieved an electoral majority, was able to conquer public and private institutions through extrapolate mentary measures and what impact thats had on us. And so the story is a historical telling. The history of this movement, telling the progression of ideas through institutions. Its biographical story. I tell the biographical history four of the leading intellectuals of this period. Lets see if i remember too having written this book in a while. Herbert marcuse, paolo ferreira, angela davis and derrick bell. For those of you who are not familiar them herbert marcuse. I was a critical theorist. One of the founders of the discipline of critical. He was also the godfather, the new left in the late 1960s in the united, as well as in european capitals for, a brief blaze of glory were student radicals, were carrying banners that said, you know, marx, mao, marxism. Those were the, you know, the itd be the the philosopher for that the pen the sword and the prophet. Thats how he was conceptualized for a period. And if you read his work, you study his life, you realize that the conceptual framework that he established in a relatively brief period mid 1960s to the mid 1970s, about ten years, is still the dominant intellectual framework that the left operates on today. Whether they know it or not, many people dont. Paolo freire was a brazilian. Marx ist pedagogy just happens to also be the third most cited author in all of the social sciences in the United States. Actually quite influential, if you think about it and, you know he he for example to give you a sense of his politics called the chinese cultural revolution quote the most genial solution the century. To give you an idea of who his inspirations were. Angela davis, of course, is black Panther Party communist party, usa, kind of ethno marxist radical of the 1960s who establish a kind of specifically ethnic, radical, Political Movement that was the precursor or inspiration and carbon template for the black lives movement that emerged a half century later under tutelage not only intellectually, but actually directly. And if you read angela davis work, or if you read it, digested through my book, youll find all of the phrasing, all of the concepts, all of the rhetorical lines, all of the political tactics, even all of the esthetic references of the black lives Matter Movement that crested in 2020, was established by angela davis. By 1969. In the last, you know person on the list of infamy was derrick bell, who was the founder, rather the godfather of critical race. So if you look at this as a progression, you could see it starting with critical theory. Then theres kind a can race radicalism merged together on the harvard campus with professor derrick bell, who became an influential figure of taking many of these ideas from fringes into the centers of power. And he was also a campus activist. Many of the techniques that bureaucrats have used to gain power within for universities or government agencies. We now it affectionately as d. I. Diversity, equity and inclusion. Derrick bell developed a lot of techniques in the eighties nineties and created this kind of pessimistic pseudo radical movement that occupied positions then of power and prestige over time. But what i think is actually interesting about all of these figures is not intellectual work. If you look at purely abstractly what exception of mark, whos a who actually is a heavyweight. Theres some some real even if you disagree with it, cannot deny that he has a certain depth of thought. A serious scholar. The other ones there intellectual work is is lacking. Its shallow by comparison. But whats interesting about them is that their intellectual work was oriented towards practical power . It was an intellectual enterprise that had political praxis embedded it, and they were actually willing to do the political work of getting those ideas into positions of authority, to take hegemony over institution. And lo and behold there were two phases to this revolution. The first not so successful. Second, quite successful. The first was a explore licit marxist leninist guerilla warfare revolution. The black Panther Party, when that became not radical enough, it splintered into black liberation army. You had the Weather Underground and this other network of movements. And for those of you i know, everyone here is is is under 50. But for those of us who are a little younger might not remember it. I was actually shocked to understand and the research, the level of intensity of that period. There were Something Like more than 12 and politically motivated bombings in the United States each year. In the beginning the 1970s, dozens of airlines were being hijacked. Every year, many of which were for kind of political causes or political agitation. And some of these groups were assassinating Police Officers in new york and georgia and san francisco. They were bombing the us capital, bombing the pentagon bombing, police stations and, you know, murdering judges in extremely period. And the theory was we can take from maos cultural revolution, we can take from the marxist leninist guerillas of central america, we can adopt these tactics and have revolution again in the United States. It was delusional, but for a bit. They had some hope and then maybe give us hope. You go from property bombings, assassination, guns, kind of guerrilla warfare to the Richard Nixon 49 state landslide in about two years. The political culture shifted dramatically against this movement. But what happened then . The second phase of this campaign, which was more successful, was one that was more insidious. It was a not a long that chairman mao executed to the highlands central china, where he regrouped and then destroyed the nationalists through physical violence. It was, they call, what the german marxist student radical rudi dutschke, called the long march through the institutions. This was a peaceful but subversive march. They knew very clearly we will never get an electoral majority in the west especially in the United States. Karl marxs protege laureate, the factory workers detroit or the, you know, people in the tire factories down in tennessee or any of Industrial Workers were uninsured stood in revolution. Herbert marcuse actually said the in the United States is explicitly. Theyre with us and rather than maybe reconsider his politics he said oh well we need a revolution of the intellect, a revolution elites at the top level, and then a revolution the lumpenproletariat in marxist terminology, the people at the margins of society can be motivated towards physical and physical pressure. What do we see today . Whats Critical Race Theory . Its an academic discipline that has captured elite institutions with public funding, even though in many cases public never voted for these ideas to installed. Its not just in california and new york. Its actually, you know, almost everywhere. Its in florida. Its in texas. Well were taking care of that a little bit. But. But but the point being is that these ideas proliferate it and propagate it through the institutions. The real question is how . Thats the question i sought to answer in the book. Thats driving question that i think is important when you see, your opponent, your enemy in a certain language, successful in the same game that youre playing. The worst answer is to say, well, there, theyre there, theyre bad, theyre stupid. Dont know what theyre doing. It doesnt work. The better question is to ask, well, did they do it . And what you learn from it . And then how you adjust your own politics to respond. And so if you read the book, there are two. I tried to put two layers into it. Some people caught. I was like really excited about that. But the explicit is this history. But the embedded text is a process of learning and teaching assimilating. Ideas, tactics, strategies. Because were fighting in a different environment. If you watch a movie like mr. Smith to washington, anyone know that movie . Yeah. Its like were so far beyond that, you know. I mean, great movie. Very sweet. Very touching. But we are in a gramscian style trench by trench in, which mr. Smith would be decapitate hated instantly. You know, the poor wouldnt stand a chance. And so rather than harking with a sense of nostalgia. Of how things ought to be or lamenting that those are, that is not way that it is today. We have to fight in a better way. And so much of my time, the last few years for the year that i had to write this book and jonathan negotiated a great contract for me, he got you got me a whole year to write the book. They wanted to turn it around in like three months. You. I originally like publishers. I ask how much time some of the books of some of these books turn around in three months. Its like, i cant do this in three months. That seems impossible. Get it as much time you can, you know. But a lot of the time that i spent was writing this book. I think probably my habit, i guess, was get in the at eight jumble around on for like 90 minutes, take a phone call, maybe write the book and then do other stuff. And at the end of the afternoon. But as i was writing this book, thinking about these ideas looking at these tactics, i was also adapting some of them in some of these very public that ive been engaged in the previous few years, first, starting every year, theres like a theme kind of how ive stumbled into it the first year, 20, 21 was the fight against end of 2020, but really 2021 was the fight against Critical Race Theory. If believe the new yorker magazine, i am the what did say the conservative activists who invented the conflict over Critical Race Theory and. Some of my friends said, oh, thats awful. Thats, you know, you didnt invent the conflict because it was you know, its its a real thing but in another sense, its not wrong either. Theres a phenomenon that exists in the world. But until you it until you bring it to public consciousness, until you polarize it and until you turn it into a real political fight, thats a process of invention in some ways. Right. You have a conception of how the world is. A conception how you want the world to be. But that actually doesnt matter. You get it off the page and into the political. The next year i was doing some reporting on gender theory, schools, gender theory in hospitals, some of the i mean, kind of aztec level human sacrifice thats happening in childrens hospitals in a very dark i did a story, for example, about a doctor in portland, oregon, who has has as invented deployed a child castration robot. Like if we like you think its dystopian, you dont know the half of it. It actually it gets much worse. And then last year, my big campaign was against the dea bureaucracy. And so id like to tell a little bit about that campaign in more detail, because its the most recent. And i think that it is relevant to this book talking about a book because, again, getting off the page. I wrote the book two years ago about, the creation of this dea bureaucracy, the threat of this dea bureaucracy. And in the past year after the book was done, published, i got about destroying. That was my explicit goal. And so in january of last year, i laid out a policy paper with Manhattan Institute abolish the dea bureaucracy, restore colorblind equality in americas institutions. I made a announced mint with very special person Governor Ron Desantis of the state of florida. We held an event together where we laid the campaign abolish destroy and assault over the dea bureaucracy in every State University in the state of florida. Start there. Start with the most courageous leaders, as they were always a good place to start and then go state by state, just wiping this thing out, restricting it, stopping preventing it from from further entrenching itself. Because you have this problem of hegemony, you have a political kind of ostensible political hegemony in florida. Supermajority, texas, majority. God forbid you, go to like the south dakota, you know, massive. You know, its not even a superman short its whatever is, its a hyper majority. Lets say say. But why are your state universities by dea bureaucracies and pushing and gender theory. You have political control but your opponents have political hegemony right. Its a different different different thing. When we announced this campaign it was denounced by everybody. You know, actually, like many people, is a right wing evil plot, you know, to to to do whatever. I dont i dont pay too much attention to it, but, you know, it was seen as a fringe right wing idea. By summertime the New York Times. Invited me to publish op ed making the case for abolishing the bureaucracy, conquering some and by the of the year we had effectively begun the process of abolition. And i dont know or six states taken territory changing institutions moving the shifting incentives creating space our ideas to replace their ideas and. I think that one final point is important and. This is actually the floor of the critical theories and the place where i think we can actually have a chance to overcome them, to transcend them to to truly replace them as the guiding philosophy, the guiding ideology. Lets lets not give it too much credit, not a philosophy, but. The critical theory is operate on the principle of negation, deconstruction dismantling whatever they have these great latinate words, you know, some academics spend bunch of time thinking, you know, how can i Say Something very simple. Lets grab this osiris. Lets figure out a way to sound smart when were saying this thing. But it all really leads to the thing. They think america is evil. They think our institutions are evil they think our principles are evil. They think the Economic System is evil. They want to destroy. Dot, dot, dot. And then a utopia will emerge spontaneously. That. Thats kind of the marcuse whose litmus this is. I dont know what itll look like after, but after we. Destroy it. I think something great is going to happen. And he was that after it was well known what happened in the communist regimes of the 20 century making it a totally responsible position. Okay, conservatives, you might not like this, but early 20th century 1910, you can almost forgive people radical unions, you know lets say youre living in russia in 1910. Its not like exactly a great to be serf you know and you could say well maybe ideology has a chance, maybe will be better. You cant that by the 1970s, 1980s, god forbid, by the 2000, i mean, lets get real with this. But what we have to offer is something that goes beyond negation. Its a concrete principle of principles that we can we can govern ourselves by. We can borrow from our founding, the principles that i think still work still offer us a kind of more political, moral foundation. We can rebuild. And really what i think that how i think of my is as dan mentioned, its the work of counterrevolution. And i was recently reading thomas paine. You know, thomas paine was a conservative, but he had this beautiful line in a letter that he wrote, a french minister, he said the American Revolution was not really a revolution. It was a counterrevolution, recover lost rights and liberties. Does that sound familiar to our situation today the colonists who were revolting over the taxation right is like a heavy tax. What do you think tax rate was that they were to the to the to the king to the parliament was. Was 1 to 2 . You know, theyre like, were going to fight you to death over 1 tax, which comes that we become so complacent. Im from california. Theyre like 50 we can compromise there, but not a penny more than 50 . But i think we have to get aggressive. I think wed have to learn from our enemies and then encourage friends and what i try to wake up and do every day, i live in a small town in washington state. I dont live in i would say i live in washington. They say, oh, what neighborhood . You know, georgetown or whatever. Its like, no, no, no, washington state. And then i get very puzzled stares like you live where but what i try to wake up and do every day is to put victories on the board because of the mind that even a small victory opens new possibilities. You learn something by the process of trying, maybe failing, but actually i think people say you learn most from your failures no. You learn most from your victories and victories. Create other opportunities they have this beautiful effect where new veins of possibility open up new contacts, new information, new resources, new people and we need to increase the tempo of. Our victories. You know, we dont need five year strategic plans. We need like 50 day strategic plans, victory after victory after show people that its passive so we have a demoralized Political Movement. And i think that one of the most important things we can do is to demoralize it. I mean, we moralize it in the sense of like, you know, no queens in kindergarten. Thats one way to do it. But i really mean more of us in the sense of motivating people, reminding them why were fighting, reminding them what the problems are, naming the enemy, and then calling them to defeat it. I think its very possible. I think that it is. We are in a situation that is more perilous than its ever been. But in some ways we have enough a base and enough of a possibility of success that its absolutely worth fighting. So thanks the award. Thank you for coming. And we love to have the discussion and get some questions after the conversation. Thank you. Thank you, chris. Those were wonderful remarks. And i actually want to begin where you left off about victories. Have we reached a turning point, the campaign to expose those and defeat die Critical Race Theory and other such because weve seen these victories in florida and a number of other states is the enemy now somewhat in retreat . Are they is their advance at least arrested or are they perhaps gathering for a counter offensive at some point . So the in the ideal of our republic is supposed to be governed by the majority with some, you know, institutional constraints, checks and balances and so forth. But the founders actually quite clear on this. You know, a republic, a democracy is, essentially the rule of public. Machiavelli even said before that. But were in a very strange where you see this locally in, lets say, blue cities, and you see this more broadly and red states. And and in our country, the public is against kind of left wing racialist ideology. The public is against the kind of derangement of the Public University system. The public is against, you know, gender, ideology and secret child sexual transitions in. Look at any of the polling. These are all 70 80 issues, but theyre not policy. And so to me, the political work is two fold. One, you have to dominate Public Opinion. You have to create the language. You have to feed it into the media cycle. And then you to polarize a Strong Majority of the public in your favor. Because politicians are lagging indicators. Politicians get when its a little safer in general, state legislators. So. So you have to create the conditions for to not have courage principles all these beautiful things but actually its easier to do do the thing to not do the thing. So the Public Opinion is, i think, the basis of this. But then theres an institutional problem. I think ideologically weve defeated this ideologies in the sense if you look at the public polling were in a strong position against them. So say, oh, that therefore, you know, woke has. Ever heard that people say that like some stupid columnist. The woke as were peak woke you know post woke. Okay yeah measured by Public Opinion maybe its crested but not bureaucratic and administratively when you have people whose you have now tens of thousands hundreds of thousands people whose livelihoods depend on promoting these ideas in institutions, kthrough12 school system, university system, federal bureaucracy. When they have functional control over the institution, the job not done and mobilized Public Opinion doesnt matter. The next step, which is much more difficult, although were making there too, were having fun, is to actually change the composition of the institutions change leadership of the institutions and to replace people of the institutions with different people, with better ideas. Thats a lot harder. And so i kind of jokingly kind of not jokingly say we need like a pink slip counterrevolution. We need to have like the pink paper printers at maximum because ultimately these these victories can only be made real and made meaningful if we have a return almost to a spoils style system when we win control of the government, of the political system, we were in control of the institutions and they advance our principles. That to me is the harder fight. And i think were slowly trying figure that out, but its far from over. You know, your remarks brought up a curious paradox, which is that we have many states where, as you said, we perhaps even have a hyper majority of conservative legislators, legislators who consider themselves conservative, who are republicans and we see that the institutions of education and the institutions of character formation, many cases are dominated still by the left. I also think im a few years older than you, and i back to the america that i grew up in, which was a much more conservative america we have today. And yet somehow some complacency or some weakness on the part of that stronger and more virtuous america opened the door. The insanity that weve seen in the last plus years. Im curious, what do you think has created this sense, complacency or this obliviousness. So many conservative people towards the threat that theyre facing, a very radical, revolutionary left . Well, id to with with somewhat tongue in cheek id like to blame two groups of people on the right. Id like to blame baby boomers and id like to blame libertarians. You know. And i wont just launch that out there. Ill explain. Baby boomers inherited, a world conservative. Baby boomers, lets say, inherited a world in which we had one. The existential struggle with communism. We defeated the soviet union. Wed relegated it to a kind of forgotten evil period in history that never be resurrected again. And then people did a couple of things. They retreated to, Economic Life running, businesses making money. They retreated to maybe religious and spiritual life, you know, going to church, taking care of the people around them. Good. Make money care of your people. These are good things. But i think they abdicated the Public Square. They didnt feel like they felt like the threat was over and they could relax. Angela davis you know, all the people who were still alive, you know, still pushing. They didnt take the the defeat of the soviet union as a defeat. They took it as a temporary setback. But the second group and i can say this because i used to maybe be one, is a libertarian is a libertarians capture the kind of conservative mind with some damaging ideas institutional. If you think about it. I mean we we just need to make sure the institutions are neutral you know. Okay all right. I always ask, you know, libertarians you know, okay, great. That thats a good but help me out here. Name one institution in Human History has been neutral. Its very hard answer because of course its impossible. Institutions will be governed according to a set of principles and according to really one highest principle. Politics is a competition. What is at the top administratively, we like weve got a president , but also morally spiritually even what principle is the guiding principle that orients all the. The left knows this d. I. Our institutions are governed. These this trio of principles. What is it for the right . What do we offer you . Ask conservative. Even conservative university. You know whats. Whats the telos . Whats the final cause of the University Raising money . Uh, building new buildings. Weve got a great football team. This, you know, the trustees are very excited about. Institutional neutrality gets you there. Institute neutrality is, you know, unilateral surrender. Thats it amounts to in practice. And so you get conservatives who become the caretakers of their enemies institutions. You know ill be at the top kind of figurehead but everyone below is operating a different set of principles and so theres a whole series of them. But i think thats the thats the most important one and then i can education two things that i think are just like, oh my god, its such a big problem we need to teach kids to think not what to think. And hey, how that even logically possible, how do you teach a kid how to think without any content and then be if you evaporate kind of content decisions, somebody else will fill those. You get howard zinn for your class. You know, hes not teaching kids. And also its a really irresponsible thing to do. Kids dont know anything. You actually have to teach them least for a while, what to think. Thats important. This is the value were trying to transmit from one generation to the next. And the other. And this is kind of a bush administration. And then, you know, and then subsequently is this kind of reduction of education into a material science in which the test score line up. One problem is that the test score line never goes up like 50 years. Its been completely flat. But the bigger problem is not that thats a horrible goal for education to reduce it, to test score line up. What youre essentially is saying we want iq to up you know, which is like kind of a i mean its an uncomfortable thing for people talk about but its also like how you do it. That doesnt really make any sense. This like a poor objective. We dont know how to this. The purpose of education. If you go back to aristotle little book eight of the politics, aristotles great statement on education in a book called the politics which gives you a sense of how it should be embedded. And he says something that is completely true. You should educate children into the political regime, you should form their character, the type of society that you want to maintain. Are we educating our children into a kind of republic . An set of virtues and habits and principles . Not at all. You sound like a crazy person if you even say Something Like that. And so i think weve abdicated on on those fronts. Your remarks have put me in mind of a rather dark passage in, alexis, to tocquevilles democracy in america where he predicts that the path towards what he calls democratic despotism, where people will willingly, voluntarily give up their culture, their everything to some centralize is to hillary. Power is going to come through what he calls individualism, which sounds like he may be criticizing kind of libertarians of aunt elettra, but fact, what he means is a retreat into the wholesome parts of life that nonetheless leave the Public Square and politics empty. So you get people concentrating on family, concentrate on religion, which are good things. But to the extent that they withdraw politics, they then leave politics, be colonized by the power of despotism. And i think youre quite right as well that. Theres a way in which both the libertarian flaws and also the flaws of the baby boomers combined, a whole generation of conservatives, not just among the boomers, but perhaps even people of generation x, like my own generation, which is there was this feeling among conservatives once the left was defeated in the cold war, once there were other things that were stopped, you know, in individual battles that the natural course would reassert itself and people return to the sort of the mayberry kind of that had been imagined, you know, in an earlier part of america. And that wasnt the case. That, in fact, you know, simply retreating from the Public Square and going back to private, although you could have a nice gated community, you could have a nice, you know, your particular parish might be fine. The institutions of higher education, the institutions of politics, the federal bureaucracy, all of that was being corrupted weaponized and used against us. And now we see whats happened. So with that being said, what do you see as the role models or examples that you would look to as exemplars that have succeeded in changing things the better . Resisting revolution airy movements. Who do you look to for inspiration . Ooh, historically or contemporary. Historically and contemporary. Well, i think you can. You can look to the founding for some historical exemplars, absolute glee. And one thing that i do wear, or i and this is strikes at the theme that were talking about, were talking about ideas and power the relationship between the two tension between the two. Theres a tendency, i think among people like me can who write for a living and for a living and you know desk bound peoples, um, theres this kind of vision of the founders you get that i see in concert among conservatives that is very they were aloof statesmen above it all. They ruled on by the pen through principle. And then you actually read about the you read about their lives and its like, no these were unruly, you know, samuel adams, you know, had a trained mob of of liberty men that were tarring and feathering and and chasing people out of town and and, you know, commandeering ships. These were people that had the spirit of of conflict. They understood politics at most essential. Its a form of conflict. And so i think, you know, wed like to always have the conflict of persuasion. Right. Thats the ideal form of conflict in a republic. The first language of the republic is is the language of persuasion. But were not even really willing to do that. And so i think that that is one certainly inspiration. But then i think for other kind of more practical kind of methods, i look to the left. Mm hmm. I think that theres, you know, more practically valuable book than reading antonio gramsci. And actually, if you read gramsci, whats of amazing is he actually sounds very conservative of you read gramsci talking about the importance family against kind of libertine ism and disillusion. You read gramsci about humanistic education, reduce it, bringing education away, the drudgery of training for a kind of mechanical Materialist Society and elevating people through the great tradition of of the west and say, my god and gramsci is now a reactionary. You know, if he were to publish this today. And so i think that a you also have to look at the winners, right. You know as examples and so it maybe sound kind of odd maybe sound kind of weird and you have to separate the bad ideas obviously like you, its a sifting process, but look the last century you have to study the winners and i think one thing i think about in this question right now is today the United States has a larger government measured as a percentage of gdp than communist china. I lived in china, so i know that its not an exact comparison to have problems there, but theyre much more we have much more freedoms here. But in an important sense, you know, we have a larger state than communist china. You know, that should tell you where we are as a country and kind of raise your thinking to a new level of seriousness. What surprised you most of studying about studying like gramsci or marcuse . What did you find in them that you didnt expect perhaps to encounter . You always, you know, theres, theres a kind of genre. The book that i wrote is not new thing people been talking about the long march for the institution and people have been talking about a phrase that i dont use in the book purposely called cultural marxism. I didnt use because its kind of loaded. Its a conflict. I kind of didnt want to, you know, be the tinfoil hat. But then the new republic, this massive piece Christopher Rufo cultural marxist theory and all about cultural marxism. And then i politely pointed out, oh thats interesting. Show me where in the text they call it cultural marxism. I think the lady was pretty mad, but but whatever its not a new right. I think a deepening i think its substantiated in a new but you get a certain genre of conservative book that treats these people as one dimensional evil cartoon villains. What was surprising to me and what i really tried to do is is just to actually look at it from the other perspective. What made these people so fascinating . What made them so charismatic . What made them take people from elite america and. Risk it all to fight for their ideals. I think thats a much better way of approaching. And so i had left wing writers, like from very left wing magazines, you know, say like, god, you know, i kind of liked your book, you know, but but i think one thing you cant do is dismiss people also, like youre going to spend a year your time with peoples lives and thinking about them and reading about them. Its like you shouldnt hate them. You shouldnt, you know, constantly dismiss them or have a smug sense about. And so you should see them in a three dimensional way. And. I kind of put myself in the shoes, this these milieu right . Its like, well, theres something here that is attractive, something here thats idealistic. Something here thats utopian something queer that is inspiring. And so and of course, theyre monsters. Theyre theyre evil. Their ideology is responsible for the deaths of many many people. Theres too. Thats the obvious point. Right. But less obvious point is, you know what, was good about them. And i think thats something that i was fascinated with the process. Mm hmm. Chris will be very amused to hear that recently at modern age journal, we had an interview with the left feminist naomi wolf, who is, you know, somewhat unusual among these days. Shes very critical, actually, of the todays far and censorious tendencies. And she actually used the phrase cultural marxism. Oh, good for her. The next time you know, new republic wants to come after someone with the phrase they should leave chris rufo alone. They can they can talk about naomi wolf. So it. Yeah. And thats a good i think its like cultural marxism is their phrase. If look at even the academic scholarship in the 1990s, theres a marcuse, a scholar i think he was at at ucla. Great resource he published all of marxs collected works letters correspondence i drew on this work quite a bit. Cant remember the fellows name, but its in the footnotes somewhere and theyre reading his papers and and its like, son of a , this guy. And like 1995, hes a lefty. Its like, you know, it was critical theory. Cultural marxism. Western marxism. Those were their categories. And then they became a kind of preposterous, oh, its a right wing theory. Its an antisemitic conspiracy there. Its like, are you what . You know, i just spent a whole id probably, you know, im like the only, like, bestseller author to write about Critical Race Theory. So i kind of know something about it. Ive sold more books than the critical race theorist, which is kind of a cool thing. You. But its like, its like its got to do with what . What are you . People are nuts . You know, this doesnt make any sense, but i think the important thing there is maybe an important for all of us and maybe an important to close on and give some food for thought language. Language matters. Its critically how we speak. You know, and its a kind of character test, not a character test in the test that i kind of virtue, but its a character type, rather. Thats a better way to put it. We need sophisticated people who understand language which that can make sense, that has intellectual force and that has emotional force. Theres this idea that we should, you know, the conservative thing like you guys have heard this and this like neutrality all these problems that i have, the one thing that others drives me crazy is you know facts dont care about your feelings. Youve heard this. Its like a very smug thing to say, you know . And i love ben shapiro. He became famous for that. And i saw ben last night. Love ben. Not a knock on him at hes a great communicator. But but i think that that is actually completely backwards. I think the facts really dont about your you know no yeah. The facts dont care about your feelings much. So what is it not have it backwards. I dont care about their feelings your feelings do not care about the facts. Have you ever persuaded your wife a rigorous, logical presentation . Yeah. You know. No. Has it has a has a car salesman ever sold you a ferrari by nerding out on on the details of the piston or whatever it is. I dont know. No. The ferrari gives you a feeling because its a beautiful car and when you drive it you feel powerful. And so we have to be contrary. This notion of of of having the strongest argument and, the greatest logic, we have those things. I think we to have language that moves. Language that that inflame people and language that people out of the realm of a kind of pass of existence and into politics, which means conflict, which controversy and which means fighting temperamentally. I like fighting. Its very suitable to me. But we need more people that are willing to get out there and fight things out. And i think that the genesis of all this is is strong and persuasive language. And so thats why its such an honor to win book award. I put many words into the book they cut about 40,000 of the words out of the manuscript it would have been even bigger but i think this makes it very readable and im so honored and grateful to get recognized in this way and some great competitors this year. And so, you know, really appreciate that thanks, chris. So we have time some question and answer sessions from the audience and theres a lot of questions. Lets start down here with the gentleman towards front and we have a mic thats coming down and please identify yourself before you ask a question good evening. William kleinman compass legal group. Ill just get to the point. I think the the principle i think we need to learn from the last few years and the same line with chriss work is we cant fear to use power. But specifically i want to ask one exercise of power very curious chriss opinion, the anti ticktock bill. To me its a lets lets take this by the exercise power but its i think its splitting the the conservative a bit so i want to get your yeah i didnt read the bill so. I cant comment specifically on the text. I dont if its wellwritten, poorly written that stuff does. But as a as, as a general principle. Know this is kind of another free market blind spot. Im a capitalist you know i like to get paid i dont think anything wrong with that. I like to create value in the world but the idea that you can give a foreign adversary, unlimited access to your country with no terms and conditions, no reciprocity, no restrictions is insane. I lived in china for a year and. 829 and i notice something very interesting interesting. Facebook, i dont think twitter was invented yet, but there was like facebook. There were some social media that myspace was all social media platforms were pop in the United States. They were banned china. But what chinese did is they did copycats. I can remember what it was called at the time but you have a website that looks identical to facebook, but its some chinese website they like, you know, massacre or the intellectual property. I mean, its rampant ip theft. If you have an American Company thats in china at the time, i believe you have to give a chinese partner. 51 stake. Mm. Oh, 51 . Why would they choose 51 and not 49 . Oh, because then you have total control over the company. And so i think that even a free market basis, even on look at adam smith, adam smith a protectionist. But even if you say hey, free trade in general is good, you have a parade of principles and you know ricardo ricardian economics. Okay fine agree but you to have some kind of reciprocity and if its an adversary you need to protect your people first and foremost and so you know i say just get rid of it. Why not . You know, you go further and further than what the current the current bill does, why did asset transfer into american ownership . I think thats kind of a joke. Look, ive spent a year in china. The idea that they own tiktok. And then if you have if the accountants and the lawyers change, the you know, the domicile of the corporation and the Ownership Structure that theyre not going to have the same access is insane. You have be naive to think that they will have access to that thats baked into it you know and so if if if the argument is the ccp cant have access to a that is in all of our cell phones, you have to just say no more and then maybe say under the conditions that you let all of our social media apps work in china that seems be a prudent middle ground. So i see a question from michael maybank and well go to the front after that. So go. Thank you. Thanks for doing this this evening. So one of the things i think that a lot of us run into, that were in a president ial year is we have that. Mr. Biden. Mr. Trump and ill be talking to somebody socially and all of a sudden we break into camps are you for or trump or biden and emotions come out either side and i will say. Well what policies you want to talk about its really hard to talk about policies. Is that typical in america or are we are we in situation now where we just cant talk about policy because of personality . Yeah. Yeah. People dont care about policies. They care about people, personalities, drama. And so thats look, thats thats it. I mean and you know, trump has been media star. What, 50 years i mean guys a phenomenon in that way and hes very polarizing and for obvious reasons. But i dont know. I ive managed to avoid those conversations. If im like on an airplane and people ask me what do i say . I run a private research firm, you know, i made a couple mistakes in the past where like, oh, im in politics, know, its like i will never make that mistake again again, avoid those conversations, dont get in those arguments, and then surround with friends. And thats the best way to do it. And hi, im bill maher, and im running for congress in virginias eighth district, a d plus 23 seat that im unlikely to win. Im fighting the good i to say im a little bit closer in age to the Generation X Group and, not to not to disparage our young, lovely author here, but in my opinion what we need most from the right is to unseat silent the silent majority we need to be as rude to the democrats as, they are to us every day of the week and my question is, you know. Thank thank isi for all the good work they do putting, putting good ideas in the hands of in the hands of the next generation. You know, and thank thank christopher for his his great work. You know, i love the fact that he wants to not just be a warrior and burn the bridge between the left and the right but to run over the bridge first, insult the land on the left side, you know, but you know, the fact of the matter is, were today and were today because were on we are not reagan enough. Were optimistic. We need leaders on on the right. What you do to fix that. Yeah i, i disagree. I disagree actually with almost everything that you said said. And ill explain why. You know. You assume that were in the majority. Im not sure that that is the case as it was in nixons time, nixon had the great speech about the silent majority than, the non screamers, the non shouters know im a nixon. I love nixon. You know. That was undoubtably then. Im not sure its true today. And then the idea about, you know, getting in peoples faces, stopping so polite, stopping silent. Im also not persuaded that thats a good thing you be, you know, rude to people. You can attack people you can be vi to live with people. But if they control the institutions, hold the power, youre not actually doing anything so. Dont mistake noise for effective political action. Im almost never mean to people i dont fights. Im not involved in drama to the extent that i can. I try not to get too personal though sometimes you know im tempted and i do it. Its a weakness. But i think that then you can descend into kind of politics. Weve seen a lot of lately. We actually have to be very headed, very smart, very deliberate. I think one of the great things about the right is also standards. You know, maintaining some standards of of to the extent that we can, um, and then i think optimism is also not, not, not necessary, and maybe not even desirable. Um, you know. I think if, you know, i think its misreading of reagan. I mean, reagan was like a flame throwing radical. He wasnt above it all. You know, the great communicator, i mean, you know, even conservatives didnt like him at the time, right. Many conservatives thought he was too extreme radical, too too polarizing. So weve kind of look back. But. I think that we have people that are in some sense too optimistic. They become naive optimism taken to, its extremist becomes naive. And so i think we need a balance of pessimist ism and optimism that is oriented towards towards seriousness of purpose. That, to me seems the thing thats lacking than anything is a sense of and an understanding the true nature of politics and and i think, look, the right and getting in peoples faces is always a loser for us the left can burn down city and the media will cover for them. If theres one bad person in a crowd at a conservative rally or something, it tars everybody. And so i think we try to avoid that. Take a question from the woman in the back. Yeah, you. Yep. Im sorry. Im more. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Oh, oh. I cannot wait to tell my folks about this. Thats. Thats hilarious, right lights, right . Lights. Long hair, a person. I only see the long and assume so. So. And what are your pronouns . Okay, im just going to pretend that didnt happen. So im okay. Okay, lets get. Lets get the giggles out. So anyway its a pretty big fan of yours. Im probably the youngest person in the room. Im only 18. Im a senior in high school. All right. We go to formally tc across the river in alexandria and its been completely captured by for lack of a better term, selfabsorbed marxists. I remember last year i was walking for the hallways at my school and like one of the teachers put up a poster of one of the philosopher, as you mentioned, actually angela davis on the wall. Im like, what . You know, i was like, this is america. Why . Why is this happening . And another instance of this happening was, you know, i was in geometry class and it was june last year. Of course, pride month, pride before the fall. And i remember my geometry teacher had put up like all this like this whole milieu of just just rain. Lets, lets call it rainbow content. And i was just thinking to myself, you know, i dont think transgender ism has anything to do with geometry. I dont know. Senior. So my is what be your biggest piece of advice to someone like me who is like pretty much trapped the Public School system . I have a number six months and then im out, but i now know that six months, two and a half months, i keep losing track of time. But anyway, so what would be your biggest piece of advice to someone like . Me, who is a Public School . What can i to, i guess, reduce the suffering a little bit . Yeah, a couple of things. And i think this is a great question and im actually very optimistic about young people. I did an event two nights ago at a extremely right wing avant garde art space. New york city, it sounds like like with like hundreds of people, mostly young with pseudonymous twitter account and radical ideas and and it was galvanizing and it was like a scene in new york, its like a cool scene, you know. Whats really is that theres this phenomenon if you look at the lefts organizing principles, primarily along race and gender, you have kind of race, radicalism, racialist ideology, and then you have kind of gender ideology, gender theory, kind of nonbinary, trans identities, etc. This is like the first youth subculture history that is not driven by the youth but driven by the adults. I mean, really, truly and i think that there is a rebelliousness and in this country, if you look at especially young men, are extremely with whats happening. They have this this rebellious energy and indulge it. You know, youre young. Thats a time for rebellion. And i would say organize a small group of people. You could have two friends, three friends, five friends, ten friends. God forbid thats enough. Create a block b, llc, a kind of ideological block within a Small Institution like a high school and dont have to put up with any anymore. Seriously. And if the teacher is spouting off, push him on it and push. Ask questions. Ask questions. This sounds bad and its not maybe kind of conservative, but i think its justified in this case embarrass your teacher front of others. Make sure he doesnt do that again. I really believe that. And and and then take the they take the hits. I a lot of people say, oh, well, i should just shut up and write the paper in college that the teacher wants to get an a. Im much more impressed with the kid that eats the c and doesnt compromise this. Yeah so thank you sir that was an excellent question. We are just about out of time, but the conversation will continue with chris rufo is including his next book and in the pages of modern age in modern age journal dot com and. Thank you all for coming tonight i want to thank athos pr for sponsoring tonights event and also the henry and Balaji Foundation for all of their sponsorship and support for the conservative book of the year award. Thank you chris. Thank you. We thank you all coming to bed. Theres not a lot of in this book i must love you because ive been up to since two in the morning. Ill be getting up at two tomorrow morning. So those of